While I am writing an article for next week, a very difficult article for me which I have never published before, please read on for the latest in the Shirley McKie case, which I have been watching with interest .. due to what has been described as a cover up involving "criminality" by the Scottish Executive and it's various departments - particularly .. the Crown Office of Scotland, along with the rest of the usual suspects .. the SCRO, probably the Courts Service (always used as a bludgeon against those who critisise the establishment) .. and even .. the cops ...

If you go over to the InjusticeScotland website, at http://groups.msn.com/injusticescotland, you will read about the McKie case - where a service Police Officer was framed for a fingerprint, allegedly left at the scene of a murder - all that turned out to be fake, though .. and you can read the full story along with subsequent media articles on the InjusticeScotland site .. and find plenty more references on Google too !

Why is this case of interest to me ? well .. the secret report which alleges a cover up involving criminalty by people involved in the case to protect their blunders and liveliehoods - at the expense and victimisation of Ms McKie ... mirrors exactly what is happening with regard to my own case, and that of many others who have been ripped off by Scottish lawyers and the Law Society of Scotland.

How is this so ? Well .. it's simple. The whole system of self-regulation of the legal profession - that which allowed the likes of crooked Andrew Penman of Stormonth Darling Solicitors, 5, The Square, Kelso, to rip off my dad's estate .. and all the subsequent lawyers who plundered and looted my family's assets including, finally, our home,  could not actually exist if it was not for the agreement of those at the Scottish Executive to turn a blind eye and do nothing while lawyer after lawyer ripped off client ... and the game of letter writing between client, lawyer, Law Society, politician, etc .. goes on, endlessly, to preserve that system of criminality in perpetuity so everyone can get their pockets filled, while the clients assets are stolen and looted at-will by crooked lawyers up and down the country ... simple as that !

So, read on for an article appearing in today's Scotsman showing just how the Lord Advocate in Scotland, views corruption by his own staff and colleagues ... taking the view that it is, as is traditional in Scotland - better to sweep it under the carpet, rather than weed out the crooks ... just like his pals over at the Law Society of Scotland ..... two of a kind ? perhaps ....

See you next week for more on my own case ...

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=253522006

Father tells of disgust as Boyd breaks silence over McKie case
MICHAEL HOWIE

SCOTLAND'S most senior prosecutor broke his silence over the Shirley McKie fingerprint case yesterday to defend his decision not to bring charges against anyone over the alleged "cover-up".

Colin Boyd, QC, the Lord Advocate, took the unprecedented step of writing to George Reid, the Scottish Parliament's Presiding Officer, amid growing demands for a full public inquiry.

Ms McKie, 43, a former Strathclyde Police detective, was wrongly accused of leaving her fingerprint at a murder scene and has fought a nine-year battle to clear her name. She claims the failure to prosecute anyone at the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) over the incident is as a result of a conspiracy by the legal establishment.

But the Lord Advocate said he chose not to proceed with a criminal case because of "conflicting" evidence from fingerprint experts.

He also defended the original decision to prosecute Ms McKie for perjury, saying there was "sufficient evidence in law" for a trial.

Last night, Shirley's father, Iain McKie, said he was "disgusted" at Mr Boyd's letter and insisted he had "irrefutable" evidence to support a criminal prosecution. The Lord Advocate was also accused of "trying to defend the indefensible" by one MSP.

The Crown Office was reportedly told five years ago that, after the original mistake had been made, it was covered up in a "criminal" manner, as the fingerprint service refused to accept it had been wrong. One theory is that prosecutors did not want to undermine the case against David Asbury, who was tried and convicted of murdering Marion Ross. It was during this case that Ms McKie was alleged to have left a fingerprint at the murder scene, a claim she denied.

After Asbury was convicted, Ms McKie was tried for perjury but was acquitted after evidence from two US fingerprint experts refuted the claim that the print was hers. Asbury later had his conviction quashed on appeal.

Ms McKie has always insisted the print was not hers and was last week awarded £750,000 compensation by the Scottish Executive in an out-of-court settlement. The First Minister, Jack McConnell, insisted there had been an "honest mistake" by fingerprint experts who wrongly accused her of intruding on the murder scene in 1997.

Mr Boyd - who yesterday made clear he supports the Executive's decision not to hold a public inquiry - said the decision to prosecute Ms McKie for perjury was taken by him, as Solicitor General, in 1998, following a report by the regional procurator fiscal for Glasgow.

"I am satisfied that the evidence available at the time justified criminal proceedings," he said. "The evidence against her was tested at trial. There was clearly sufficient evidence in law, because the case went to the jury, who ultimately acquitted her."

Senior officers at Tayside Police were then instructed by the regional procurator fiscal for North Strathclyde to investigate possible perjury and criminal conspiracy in relation to the fingerprint officer who gave evidence in the Asbury and McKie trials.

A report, which included "careful examination of expert evidence", was submitted to Mr Boyd in 2001.

His letter to Mr Reid stated: "Following full and careful consideration of these reports, I concluded that there was insufficient reliable evidence to found a prosecution. Before any proceedings in respect of that evidence could have been contemplated, I would require to have been satisfied that a court could accept beyond reasonable doubt not only that there was a misidentification, but that the evidence was given dishonestly and with criminal intent.

"In the light of the whole evidence available to me, including evidence from experts instructed by the defence which supported the SCRO evidence, it was clear that such intent could not be demonstrated.

"Since the time the issue arose in the trial of Shirley McKie, there have always been, and there remain, conflicting expert views on the issue of identification of the relevant fingerprints. I concluded in 2001 that the conflict in expert evidence was such that there could be no question of criminal proceedings."

Mr McKie said the letter failed to shed any new light on his daughter's case and that the need for a public inquiry was "greater than ever".

"The cover-up continues," he said. "I'm absolutely disgusted at this statement by the Lord Advocate - he hasn't told us anything we do not already know.

"The Lord Advocate is saying there was evidence on both sides, but there was overwhelming evidence the experts were wrong and overwhelming evidence ... that there was criminality."

Alex Neil, an SNP MSP for Central Scotland who has lodged a parliamentary motion of no confidence in Mr Boyd, claimed the Lord Advocate and Cathy Jamieson, the justice minister, were "trying to defend the indefensible". He said: "This simply underlines the need for a full public inquiry.

How do you defend a lie ? simple ... tell another lie, and another and another and another .. until, at least in the eyes of those in control of the situation, that lie becomes the truth ... want an example of this ? then head over to http://groups.msn.com/injusticescotland and read the articles on the Shirley McKie case, where a Glasgow Detective was framed  by the Scottish Criminal Records Office for over 9 years with fake fingerprint evidence .... but when it originally happened - and the SCRO did their bit ... everyone jumped in and covered up for them .. so Ms McKie had to wait for 9 years before she gained some measure of Justice ... although the story of corruption and criminal cover up in that case rumbles on ....

So, back to me...

Me & Garry Watson - the former Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, never really saw eye to eye on his investigation of the complaint against Andrew Penman, but he did at least, reveal to me, the extent of the cover up and conspiracy within the Law Society of Scotland to ensure that Andrew Penman - the crooked lawyer who ripped off my father's estate, got off with a slap on the wrist ...

I had a meeting with Mr Watson, while he was in his post as Legal Services Ombudsman, and I have to say, it was a good meeting, at least I had thought so .. quite amiable, and I gave him a few points of my own which I wanted looked at, which he agreed to ...

The problem, however, came after his report - when the Law Society of Scotland had a go at his recommendations in his report, refused to re-open the Penman case, and quashed any further discussion of it ....

Watson, of course, despite his protestations to me that he wanted the Law Society of Scotland to reveal what had actually happened, and what was said about my character by James Ness, the representative of Andrew Penman at the Complaints Committee ...actually went back on his word .. and, from my questioning him in further letters .. started to re-write parts of his report so that it wasn't really too big a deal whether the Law Society re-opened the case or not !!! ... how about that !! .. a big rip off by a Kelso lawyer in the Scottish Borders goes unpunished ... and the cover up which took place to keep everything quiet goes swept under the carpet !!!..

Yes, I was annoyed at this - actually .. bloody incensed I would say .. but as you can see from the various articles on this site, I had a lot of press coverage & attention so I used it over the various articles to expose what actually happened in my complaint ... and found through the many people who had contacted me over the press articles .. that it had happened to them too ...

Well - I'd say that was a criminal cover up by the Law Society and those in the Scottish Office & later the Scottish Executive ... because they knew well what was going on ... but did nothing about it, and made sure that my life was made hell while  the lawyers involved get fat bonuses and payouts for avoiding any financial damages being paid out to me .. and all those other clients they ripped off over the years ...

Anyway  ... as an example of what extent these people were determined to defend their lies .. they would regularly write misleading letters in the national press, in response to the articles on me & other ripped off clients ... Douglas Mill (Secretary of the Law Society of Scotland) for instance, was a great one for writing anti-client letters while protesting the innocence and hallowed status of Scotland's legal profession .. and Douglas Mill is a man so obsessed with particular client's cases such as mine, he would, as you have seen in earlier articles, interfere directly in my legal funding from the Scottish Legal Aid Board and block it ...  also,  occasional politicians would join the letter fray, in support of the Law Society, of course ... and even Garry Watson, the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman would be there .. writing, many times alongside Douglas Mill and other Law Society of Scotland officials in what had the grand appearance of a contrived defence of the legal profession against us, the public ... amazing stuff !!!

An example of these kinds of legal profession 'propoganda letters' follows, where as you can see, Garry Watson defends his point to the hilt, assisted by none other than Brandon Malone ... who was at least then, the SNP assistant spokesperson on "Justice & Equality" ...

Of course, their letters were easy to trash, as you can see by my own response ... and the contradictions in Mr Watson's letters versus his actual report on my case, are quite evident .. I wonder .. did he tell the lie so much he believed it too ???

Wonder what happened to Garry Watson ?? well, he also sits on the Complaints Investigatory Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland .. and was also the first Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner !!!! .. and just look at the standards we actually have in the Scottish Parliament !!!!